People ex rel. Henderson v. New York State Board of Parole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Henderson v. New York State Board of Parole

138 A.D.2d 654, 526 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3132

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 21, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 138 A.D.2d 654 (People ex rel. Henderson v. New York State Board of Parole) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People ex rel. Henderson v. New York State Board of Parole, 138 A.D.2d 654, 526 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3132 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

a habeas corpus proceeding, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Cerrato, J.), entered May 8, 1987, which granted the petition solely to the extent of directing that the [655]*655petitioner be produced "before the next available release board for release consideration”.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We have reviewed the record and agree with defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues that could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see, Anders v California, 386 US 738; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606). Mangano, J. P., Kunzeman, Rubin, Kooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

a habeas corpus proceeding, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Cerrato, J.), entered May 8, 1987, which granted the petition solely to the extent of directing that the [655]*655petitioner be produced "before the next available release board for release consideration”.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We have reviewed the record and agree with defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues that could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see, Anders v California, 386 US 738; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631; cf., People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606). Mangano, J. P., Kunzeman, Rubin, Kooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

138 A.D.2d 654, 526 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-henderson-v-new-york-state-board-of-parole-nyappdiv-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack